Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T16:33:49.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - The problem we all have with deontology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2011

Lawrence Jost
Affiliation:
University of Cincinnati
Julian Wuerth
Affiliation:
Vanderbilt University, Tennessee
Get access

Summary

I am a virtue ethicist in the sentimentalist mode, but this essay is not going to be about the advantages virtue ethics or moral sentimentalism may have over other approaches to ethics. It's about a problem, or set of problems, that all major theories of morality share: a problem about deontology. The problem is the problem of justifying deontology, something that Kantian ethics notably seeks to do, but that recent (and not-so-recent) Aristotelian virtue ethics has largely avoided. And, of course, consequentialists don't think deontology can be justified, and that, very briefly and according to the rest of us, is their problem.

What I want to show here is how difficult it is to justify deontology. I don't think Kantian ethics succeeds in doing so, but I also believe that Aristotelian virtue ethics would have very difficult going if it tried to justify deontology. Finally, there is sentimentalist virtue ethics, and, perhaps surprisingly, there are things the sentimentalist can say by way of defending deontology. But we shall see that there are some serious problems, nonetheless, with such a defense.

What do I mean by “deontology”? Well, I can't define it, but I can make some suggestions toward clarifying what most of us philosophers understand by the term.

Moral views or theories that are deontological can contain non-deontological elements, but they all entail that it is sometimes right (or even obligatory) to perform actions whose consequences, impartially considered, would be worse or less good than those of some other act available to a given agent.

Type
Chapter
Information
Perfecting Virtue
New Essays on Kantian Ethics and Virtue Ethics
, pp. 260 - 270
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×